VERIFICATION OF SPRINGBACK ANALYSIS ACCURACY IN DEEP DRAWING PROCESS WITH FOCUS ON INITIAL SETTING OF NUMERICAL SIMULATION

1 PAČÁK Tomáš
Co-authors:
1 TATÍČEK František 1 CHRÁŠŤANSKÝ Lukáš
Institution:
1 Czech Technical University in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic, EU, Tomas.Pacak@fs.cvut.cz Frantisek.Taticek@fs.cvut.cz, Lukas.Chrastansky@fs.cvut.cz
Conference:
25th Anniversary International Conference on Metallurgy and Materials, Hotel Voronez I, Brno, Czech Republic, EU, May 25th - 27th 2016
Proceedings:
Proceedings 25th Anniversary International Conference on Metallurgy and Materials
Pages:
464-469
ISBN:
978-80-87294-67-3
ISSN:
2694-9296
Published:
14th December 2016
Proceedings of the conference were published in Web of Science and Scopus.
Metrics:
72 views / 30 downloads
Abstract

Computation of the springback phenomenon in numerical simulations, together with its prediction, is a very complex subject. Final results of the springback analysis are highly dependent on the initial FE settings. Therefore, with the initial settings, final accuracy of the springback prediction can be influenced significantly. There are plenty of options in terms of initial FE settings of the numerical simulation, for better understanding, the options were divided into two major categories. First group defines the element type, BEM type (Bending Enhanced Membrane), EPS type (Elastic Plastic Shell) or modified shell element type. Second group defines the density of the meshing (radius penetration, max element angle, master element size, etc.). This article focuses on springback analysis comparison in AutoForm R6 based on various FE settings. For experiment, outer panel of fifth doors from SEAT Ateca was used.

Keywords: Springback, Numerical Simulation, Large Metal Stamping, AutoForm

© This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Scroll to Top